Sanders double whammy

We have been deliberately ambivalent toward Sanders given the way he talks about ‘socialism’ and ‘revolution’ when he has actually changed the meaning of those terms. We speak from a perspective that asks if real socialism requires a real revolution.

The start of Sanders’ new campaign is thus an interesting moment, how could we not support that, and yet…, and that exhibits our contradiction in plain view. Far be it that we should kick a gift horse in the mouth and it would be remarkable if a so-called socialist took over the White House. We must however continue to consider the need for a real social transformation of american ‘society’ and warn that we are out of time for partial measures. American politics has turned into ‘shit’ and we will flounder ad infinitum in that morass in the confused chatter about ‘democracy’.
Sanders’ misuse of terms would unfairly be blamed on him, since those terms have long since been in a halfway house of compromising semantics. We might consider it quite radical to try and leverage those terms in a sly effort to shoe horn them into public consciousness. On that basis Sanders has been a success indeed, but in the end we must consider that we can get mesmerized by electoral politics all over again and miss the larger warning that we are out of time and could squander our last decades waiting for compromised politics to do what only revolution, ‘our revolution’, and socialism, real socialism can do.
We have changed terminology here and speak only of ‘neo-communism’, terms not likely to suffer social democratic compromise…